Jim Killock, Executive Director of the Open Rights Group, writes about the Digital Economy Bill:
The Open Rights Group would like to thank the Lib Dems for taking a strong policy stance against the Digital Economy Bill’s disconnection and web blocking proposals.
The biggest danger now is that Parliament will not debate or amend the Bill at all. After the budget, the Bill could be passed with little or no debate, as the election must be called within the next few weeks. The result could be that the Bill becomes law in very bad shape.
The Lib Dems have a very significant role to play here. They have already assumed a leading position on this issue, having adopted forward thinking policy against disconnection, and in favour of openness and creativity.
The Lib Dems are also a party that strongly wishes to promote the constitutional position of Parliament against the executive, and build accountability. Liberal Democrats have a deep faith in the power of democratic debate.
Yet – in the face of a dangerous and controversial Bill – government ministers are proposing to remove that debate and parliamentary accountability. The likelihood is that ministers will try to prevent Parliamentary debate from happening, in order that the Bill is passed, with the disconnection clauses intact.
If the executive gets its way, whatever gets passed into the Bill will be agreed behind closed doors before wash-up.
Liberal Democrat MPs can choose to follow the example of the hundreds of people who are now emailing MPs to demand a debate.
Their reasons for asking for a debate are extremely proper: and any backbench MP should understand them. The Bill is technical and deep problems are unresolved. Rushing through disconnection and website blocking would be undemocratic and an abuse of Parliamentary power; it would show contempt for back benchers and be a serious blow for the legitimacy of the legislation.
For all these reasons, Liberal Democrats should lead the charge and demand a public debate.
And members should write to their MP: http://www.38degrees.org.uk/page/speakout/extremeinternetl
‘The Independent View‘ is a slot on Lib Dem Voice which allows those from beyond the party to contribute to debates we believe are of interest to LDV’s readers. Please email [email protected] if you are interested in contributing.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Urban ReLeaf - event invitation #dundeewestend
Alan Bennett on Dudley Moore and jazz
Speculation over Labour's benefit cuts
Andrew Tampion
Stephen Yolland
Joseph Bourke
Nonconformistradical
Tim Leunig
11 Comments
Already done.
When the bill comes to the Commons, I hope and expect Lib Dem MPs to be making the running in opposing it, as Jim says. But I also wish certain other people from the tech community who are whining that the Lib Dems should “stop” or “throw out” the bill could do a bit of fucking googling and acquaint themselves with how politics actually works. Liberal Democrat MPs have spent the last 13 years demanding proper scrutiny more debating time for all manner of horrendous, under-scrutinised legislation. Look at the Hansard record for every criminal justice bill passed by Labour if you don’t believe me. If it was as easy as Lib Dems standing up and demanding a public debate, we wouldn’t have ID cards or be in Iraq.
The government has a majority. This is what “strong government” is. Our MPs have been voting against wrong-headed legislation for thirteen years and getting nowhere and no-one has given a shit. So if you’re all waking up to what a bad idea it is to have an electoral system that delivers landslides to a party with the support of 22% of the population, then good. Maybe you’ll do something about it rather than expecting a political party with 63 MPs to have somehow magically sorted everything out to your exact wishes.
The Digital Economy Bill has already had its first reading in the House of Commons with out any debate!
Already done +1.
My MP is Iain Duncan Smith, who according to the excellent new site that allows you to rank how authoritarian you MP is, score 15/100 on the scale – so I would hope and expect that he would be supportive at the very least of allowing proper debate, if not of removing the disconnection clauses altogether.
Jim:
We already are – witness the spring conference motion – but sadly the government does not always follow where Lib Dems lead, as Alix points out…
[Alix, take a deep breath – all you say is of course spot on, but I fear you may explode :-)]
Glyn – the First Reading is merely the Bill being brought before Parliament. It’s purely formal, so MPs have no chance of debating it.
Alix, your points are well made and well argued, however Lord Clement Jones did not exactly help the Liberal Democrats by pushing an amendment that appears to have been a direct copy and paste job from the BPI suggested amendment.
There is however no time for recriminations and what is done is done, there is a dreadful bill to kill and that action must take priority over everything else. The BPI have given the game away.
As for the House of Commons – which will be sent the BilI next week there is a strange sense of detachment. MPs with whom we spoke back in Autumn are aIready resigned to the fact that they will have minimum input into the provisions from this point on, given the lack of time for detailed scrutiny. One leading backbencher has told us that there is ”little point in meeting, since the Bill will be determined at wash-up”. That said, John Whittingdale – an inveterate ”timing sceptic” (i .e. he’s for the Bill but doesn’t think it will get through in time) has said this week that he still thinks it could be lost if enough MPs protest at not having the opportunity to scrutinise it.
It is up to everyone, to make sure that enough MPs protest about having no opportunity to scrutinise this calamity of a bill.
Teek, fear not, I have found some alcohol and am ransacking ancestry.co.uk for cultural licence to drink it.
Hi Alix / all, I agree the LDs are doing a lot, especially at grassroots. I watched the motion get passed in Birmingham, which was great. But shortly, MPs will have to demand a debate and point out that a lack of debate is wrong. This is tricky – it involves active organisation, working with other MPs, and solidifying a Parliamentary mood. This is the opportunity that is opening up, with the tidal wave of letters from 38 Degrees, and why I wrote this column today.
I got the following response from my MP, Mark Lazarowicz (Labour):
“Thank you for your email. I understand your concerns about some aspects of the Digital Economy Bill. I have been following the debate carefully, and there are certainly a number of points in the proposals which I believe need to be substantially amended or withdrawn.
However, I think it is unlikely that the Digital Economy Bill will go through Parliament in its present form. That is because when there is unfinished legislation at the end of Parliament, there is a short period (known informally as the ‘wash up’) when any outstanding business is dealt with quickly. This process, however, can only be used for legislation which is uncontroversial and has cross-party support.
In these circumstances, I cannot see how any of the controversial aspects of the Bill could be passed before the election. I agree with you that it would be wrong if they were, but this doesn’t seem to me to be a likely prospect. I will continue to take a close interest in the Bill, in any event.”
Hope he’s right.
People, many of you are quite naive on this subject and that causes many more issues
Jim Killock really does not understand the bigger issues of protecting creative copyright. The pipes must be cleared of illegal material and the ‘public’ must pay one way or another.
Get rid of Limewire, Bitcomet, etc and we’ll see how people then share things illegally
Thanks for contacting your MP about the Bill, and for supporting our campaign.
Have you heard about our upcoming protest at Parliament against the Bill?
http://www.openrightsgroup.org/campaigns/disconnection
If you can make it, it would be great to see you there.
http://www.mgleizer.net
One Trackback
[…] by this bill has to demand that Members of Parliament do the job that they were elected to do. Parliament has a moral duty to properly debate and analyse the legislation laid before it. Members of Parliament that fail to do that are failing to do their job. Those Members of […]